You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@cxf.apache.org by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> on 2010/12/08 13:55:53 UTC
Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
I just wanted to let everyone know about Dennis' latest article at IBM
DeveloperWorks:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jws19/index.html?ca=drs
It's another well done article comparing CXF, Metro, and Axis2.
I won't spoil it, but I just want to say "well done" to the entire CXF team.
;-)
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Dennis Sosnoski <dm...@sosnoski.com>.
I was especially impressed that you got the fixes to the problems from
the last article into the 2.3.1 release (which I tested yesterday and
added to the text). :-) You and the whole team are doing a great job on
CXF, and I hope to get the chance to personally contribute to the
project in the future.
- Dennis
Dennis M. Sosnoski
Java SOA and Web Services Consulting <http://www.sosnoski.com/consult.html>
Axis2/CXF/Metro SOA and Web Services Training
<http://www.sosnoski.com/training.html>
Web Services Jump-Start <http://www.sosnoski.com/jumpstart.html>
On 12/09/2010 01:55 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> I just wanted to let everyone know about Dennis' latest article at IBM
> DeveloperWorks:
>
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jws19/index.html?ca=drs
>
> It's another well done article comparing CXF, Metro, and Axis2.
>
> I won't spoil it, but I just want to say "well done" to the entire CXF team.
> ;-)
>
>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Dennis Sosnoski <dm...@sosnoski.com>.
I was especially impressed that you got the fixes to the problems from
the last article into the 2.3.1 release (which I tested yesterday and
added to the text). :-) You and the whole team are doing a great job on
CXF, and I hope to get the chance to personally contribute to the
project in the future.
- Dennis
Dennis M. Sosnoski
Java SOA and Web Services Consulting <http://www.sosnoski.com/consult.html>
Axis2/CXF/Metro SOA and Web Services Training
<http://www.sosnoski.com/training.html>
Web Services Jump-Start <http://www.sosnoski.com/jumpstart.html>
On 12/09/2010 01:55 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> I just wanted to let everyone know about Dennis' latest article at IBM
> DeveloperWorks:
>
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jws19/index.html?ca=drs
>
> It's another well done article comparing CXF, Metro, and Axis2.
>
> I won't spoil it, but I just want to say "well done" to the entire CXF team.
> ;-)
>
>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Glen Mazza <gl...@gmail.com>.
Just be thankful you have hair to get gray. :)
On 12/08/2010 03:26 PM, Craig Tataryn wrote:
> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
>
> </rant>
>
> Craig.
>
> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@apache.org>.
+1 ;-) CXF rocks and thats it! ;-)
Jeff
On Dec 8, 2010, at 4:35 PM, Glen Mazza wrote:
> AS WAS 6.1 is built on Axis2, perhaps this thread would be better moved to the Axis2 Dev list.
>
> Glen
>
> On 12/08/2010 06:29 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 22:58, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010-12-08, at 3:33 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Looks like you made the same mistake that I've seen elsewhere: instead
>>>> of just installing the Web services feature pack on WAS 6.1 (to get
>>>> JAX-WS support) and let the IBM support take care of the issues (after
>>>> all that is what they are payed for), you spent your time trying to
>>>> integrate another SOAP stack and solve the issues yourself. That being
>>>> said, I don't know if the feature pack already existed when you did
>>>> your project, and of course for a contractor that is the more
>>>> interesting option (I would do the same in that position ;-). But OK,
>>>> let's not transform this thread into a discussion about how to deploy
>>>> Web services on WAS...
>>>>
>>>> Andreas
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I might have confused the article with another? I still stand by my statements. I don't want to use "Webservices Pack for WAS". I want to use "works regardless of servlet container and support contract". So it was not a "mistake", I fully intended to avoid the Webservices Pack.
>>>
>>> Craig.
>>>
>> This is again a misleading statement. WAS 6.1 is a J2EE 1.4 compliant
>> application server and the feature pack adds support for some parts of
>> JEE5 (in the same way as they have a feature pack to upgrade from EJB
>> 2.1 to 3.0). It doesn't tie you to a particular vendor (in contrast to
>> what they had in WebSphere 5). So, "works regardless of servlet
>> container" would really mean "doesn't use JEE5". There are indeed some
>> arguments in favor of not using JEE5, including the quality of the
>> implementation in a particular application server or the fact that for
>> some projects, it doesn't provide enough flexibility.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:26, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
>>>>>
>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
>>>>>>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>>>>>>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>>>>>>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>>>>>>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
>>>>>> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
>>>>>> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
>>>>>> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
>>>>>> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
>>>>>> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
>>>>>> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
>>>>>> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Dennis
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@apache.org>.
Andreas,
Honestly... its not misleading... this discussion really should be taken offline and go direct. There are people who like WAS and people who absolutely hate it. It can be argued all day about the merits of WAS and how great or sucky it is.... but probably not here. Just my .02. I would encourage you guys to have an email chat privately to work this out as this is really becoming a religious discussion more than the merits of the article.
Jeff
On Dec 8, 2010, at 4:45 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
> The discussion has actually nothing to do with either CXF or Axis2
> (nor with Dennis' article). I just hate it when people make misleading
> statements.
>
> Andreas
>
> On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 00:35, Glen Mazza <gl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> AS WAS 6.1 is built on Axis2, perhaps this thread would be better moved to
>> the Axis2 Dev list.
>>
>> Glen
>>
>> On 12/08/2010 06:29 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 22:58, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2010-12-08, at 3:33 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Looks like you made the same mistake that I've seen elsewhere: instead
>>>>> of just installing the Web services feature pack on WAS 6.1 (to get
>>>>> JAX-WS support) and let the IBM support take care of the issues (after
>>>>> all that is what they are payed for), you spent your time trying to
>>>>> integrate another SOAP stack and solve the issues yourself. That being
>>>>> said, I don't know if the feature pack already existed when you did
>>>>> your project, and of course for a contractor that is the more
>>>>> interesting option (I would do the same in that position ;-). But OK,
>>>>> let's not transform this thread into a discussion about how to deploy
>>>>> Web services on WAS...
>>>>>
>>>>> Andreas
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I might have confused the article with another? I still stand by my
>>>> statements. I don't want to use "Webservices Pack for WAS". I want to use
>>>> "works regardless of servlet container and support contract". So it was not
>>>> a "mistake", I fully intended to avoid the Webservices Pack.
>>>>
>>>> Craig.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is again a misleading statement. WAS 6.1 is a J2EE 1.4 compliant
>>> application server and the feature pack adds support for some parts of
>>> JEE5 (in the same way as they have a feature pack to upgrade from EJB
>>> 2.1 to 3.0). It doesn't tie you to a particular vendor (in contrast to
>>> what they had in WebSphere 5). So, "works regardless of servlet
>>> container" would really mean "doesn't use JEE5". There are indeed some
>>> arguments in favor of not using JEE5, including the quality of the
>>> implementation in a particular application server or the fact that for
>>> some projects, it doesn't provide enough flexibility.
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:26, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis
>>>>>> wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs
>>>>>> to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main
>>>>>> contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Craig.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract
>>>>>>>>> in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about
>>>>>>>> comparison
>>>>>>>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>>>>>>>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>>>>>>>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>>>>>>>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
>>>>>>> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest
>>>>>>> article
>>>>>>> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
>>>>>>> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
>>>>>>> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
>>>>>>> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to
>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
>>>>>>> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Dennis
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Dennis Sosnoski <dm...@sosnoski.com>.
On 12/09/2010 04:18 PM, Johan Edstrom wrote:
> Admittedly that thread was more entertaining.
>
:-) Well, you won't see me discussing this most recent article on the
Axis2 list.
And yes, I've found Andreas to be very fair in his assessments and
against misleading people, even when the misleading statements are in
favor of a project he's personally involved in. That said, I agree that
discussing WAS on this list is rather far afield - though it would be
interesting all around to see how the current IBM security code
performance compares to WSS4J.
- Dennis
> On Dec 8, 2010, at 4:56 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>
>
>>> I just hate it when people make misleading statements.
>>>
>> BTW, I apply the same standards to my fellow Axis2 developers [1],
>> just in case somebody thinks that I'm trying to promote a particular
>> SOAP stack here. I think that Dennis can confirm that.
>>
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/hpalcmeiy3ncwrkg
>>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com>.
Admittedly that thread was more entertaining.
On Dec 8, 2010, at 4:56 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>> I just hate it when people make misleading statements.
>
> BTW, I apply the same standards to my fellow Axis2 developers [1],
> just in case somebody thinks that I'm trying to promote a particular
> SOAP stack here. I think that Dennis can confirm that.
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/hpalcmeiy3ncwrkg
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
> I just hate it when people make misleading statements.
BTW, I apply the same standards to my fellow Axis2 developers [1],
just in case somebody thinks that I'm trying to promote a particular
SOAP stack here. I think that Dennis can confirm that.
[1] http://markmail.org/message/hpalcmeiy3ncwrkg
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
The discussion has actually nothing to do with either CXF or Axis2
(nor with Dennis' article). I just hate it when people make misleading
statements.
Andreas
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 00:35, Glen Mazza <gl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> AS WAS 6.1 is built on Axis2, perhaps this thread would be better moved to
> the Axis2 Dev list.
>
> Glen
>
> On 12/08/2010 06:29 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 22:58, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 2010-12-08, at 3:33 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Looks like you made the same mistake that I've seen elsewhere: instead
>>>> of just installing the Web services feature pack on WAS 6.1 (to get
>>>> JAX-WS support) and let the IBM support take care of the issues (after
>>>> all that is what they are payed for), you spent your time trying to
>>>> integrate another SOAP stack and solve the issues yourself. That being
>>>> said, I don't know if the feature pack already existed when you did
>>>> your project, and of course for a contractor that is the more
>>>> interesting option (I would do the same in that position ;-). But OK,
>>>> let's not transform this thread into a discussion about how to deploy
>>>> Web services on WAS...
>>>>
>>>> Andreas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I might have confused the article with another? I still stand by my
>>> statements. I don't want to use "Webservices Pack for WAS". I want to use
>>> "works regardless of servlet container and support contract". So it was not
>>> a "mistake", I fully intended to avoid the Webservices Pack.
>>>
>>> Craig.
>>>
>>
>> This is again a misleading statement. WAS 6.1 is a J2EE 1.4 compliant
>> application server and the feature pack adds support for some parts of
>> JEE5 (in the same way as they have a feature pack to upgrade from EJB
>> 2.1 to 3.0). It doesn't tie you to a particular vendor (in contrast to
>> what they had in WebSphere 5). So, "works regardless of servlet
>> container" would really mean "doesn't use JEE5". There are indeed some
>> arguments in favor of not using JEE5, including the quality of the
>> implementation in a particular application server or the fact that for
>> some projects, it doesn't provide enough flexibility.
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:26, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis
>>>>> wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs
>>>>> to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main
>>>>> contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
>>>>>
>>>>> </rant>
>>>>>
>>>>> Craig.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract
>>>>>>>> in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about
>>>>>>> comparison
>>>>>>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>>>>>>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>>>>>>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>>>>>>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
>>>>>> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest
>>>>>> article
>>>>>> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
>>>>>> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
>>>>>> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
>>>>>> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to
>>>>>> see
>>>>>> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
>>>>>> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - Dennis
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Glen Mazza <gl...@gmail.com>.
AS WAS 6.1 is built on Axis2, perhaps this thread would be better moved
to the Axis2 Dev list.
Glen
On 12/08/2010 06:29 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 22:58, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2010-12-08, at 3:33 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Looks like you made the same mistake that I've seen elsewhere: instead
>>> of just installing the Web services feature pack on WAS 6.1 (to get
>>> JAX-WS support) and let the IBM support take care of the issues (after
>>> all that is what they are payed for), you spent your time trying to
>>> integrate another SOAP stack and solve the issues yourself. That being
>>> said, I don't know if the feature pack already existed when you did
>>> your project, and of course for a contractor that is the more
>>> interesting option (I would do the same in that position ;-). But OK,
>>> let's not transform this thread into a discussion about how to deploy
>>> Web services on WAS...
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>>
>> I might have confused the article with another? I still stand by my statements. I don't want to use "Webservices Pack for WAS". I want to use "works regardless of servlet container and support contract". So it was not a "mistake", I fully intended to avoid the Webservices Pack.
>>
>> Craig.
>>
> This is again a misleading statement. WAS 6.1 is a J2EE 1.4 compliant
> application server and the feature pack adds support for some parts of
> JEE5 (in the same way as they have a feature pack to upgrade from EJB
> 2.1 to 3.0). It doesn't tie you to a particular vendor (in contrast to
> what they had in WebSphere 5). So, "works regardless of servlet
> container" would really mean "doesn't use JEE5". There are indeed some
> arguments in favor of not using JEE5, including the quality of the
> implementation in a particular application server or the fact that for
> some projects, it doesn't provide enough flexibility.
>
> Andreas
>
>
>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:26, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
>>>>
>>>> </rant>
>>>>
>>>> Craig.
>>>>
>>>> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn<cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
>>>>>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>>>>>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>>>>>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>>>>>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
>>>>> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
>>>>> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
>>>>> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
>>>>> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
>>>>> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
>>>>> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>>>>>
>>>>> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
>>>>> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>>>>>
>>>>> - Dennis
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 22:58, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>
> On 2010-12-08, at 3:33 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>
>> Looks like you made the same mistake that I've seen elsewhere: instead
>> of just installing the Web services feature pack on WAS 6.1 (to get
>> JAX-WS support) and let the IBM support take care of the issues (after
>> all that is what they are payed for), you spent your time trying to
>> integrate another SOAP stack and solve the issues yourself. That being
>> said, I don't know if the feature pack already existed when you did
>> your project, and of course for a contractor that is the more
>> interesting option (I would do the same in that position ;-). But OK,
>> let's not transform this thread into a discussion about how to deploy
>> Web services on WAS...
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>
> I might have confused the article with another? I still stand by my statements. I don't want to use "Webservices Pack for WAS". I want to use "works regardless of servlet container and support contract". So it was not a "mistake", I fully intended to avoid the Webservices Pack.
>
> Craig.
This is again a misleading statement. WAS 6.1 is a J2EE 1.4 compliant
application server and the feature pack adds support for some parts of
JEE5 (in the same way as they have a feature pack to upgrade from EJB
2.1 to 3.0). It doesn't tie you to a particular vendor (in contrast to
what they had in WebSphere 5). So, "works regardless of servlet
container" would really mean "doesn't use JEE5". There are indeed some
arguments in favor of not using JEE5, including the quality of the
implementation in a particular application server or the fact that for
some projects, it doesn't provide enough flexibility.
Andreas
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:26, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
>>>
>>> </rant>
>>>
>>> Craig.
>>>
>>> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>>>>
>>>>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
>>>>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>>>>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>>>>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>>>>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
>>>> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
>>>> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
>>>> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
>>>> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
>>>> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
>>>> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>>>>
>>>> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
>>>> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>>>>
>>>> - Dennis
>>>
>>>
>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net>.
On 2010-12-08, at 3:33 PM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
> Looks like you made the same mistake that I've seen elsewhere: instead
> of just installing the Web services feature pack on WAS 6.1 (to get
> JAX-WS support) and let the IBM support take care of the issues (after
> all that is what they are payed for), you spent your time trying to
> integrate another SOAP stack and solve the issues yourself. That being
> said, I don't know if the feature pack already existed when you did
> your project, and of course for a contractor that is the more
> interesting option (I would do the same in that position ;-). But OK,
> let's not transform this thread into a discussion about how to deploy
> Web services on WAS...
>
> Andreas
>
I might have confused the article with another? I still stand by my statements. I don't want to use "Webservices Pack for WAS". I want to use "works regardless of servlet container and support contract". So it was not a "mistake", I fully intended to avoid the Webservices Pack.
Craig.
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:26, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
>>
>> </rant>
>>
>> Craig.
>>
>> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>>>
>>>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
>>>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>>>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>>>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>>>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>>>
>>>
>>> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
>>> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
>>> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
>>> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
>>> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
>>> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
>>> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>>>
>>> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
>>> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>>>
>>> - Dennis
>>
>>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
Looks like you made the same mistake that I've seen elsewhere: instead
of just installing the Web services feature pack on WAS 6.1 (to get
JAX-WS support) and let the IBM support take care of the issues (after
all that is what they are payed for), you spent your time trying to
integrate another SOAP stack and solve the issues yourself. That being
said, I don't know if the feature pack already existed when you did
your project, and of course for a contractor that is the more
interesting option (I would do the same in that position ;-). But OK,
let's not transform this thread into a discussion about how to deploy
Web services on WAS...
Andreas
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:26, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
> We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
>
> </rant>
>
> Craig.
>
> On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>
>> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>>
>>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
>>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>>
>>
>> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
>> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
>> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
>> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
>> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
>> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
>> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>>
>> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
>> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>>
>> - Dennis
>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net>.
We were using WAS 6.1 and we needed to support HL7 payloads. Axis wasn't up to snuff. Then trying to get modern versions of JAXB and XML APIs to work with WAS wasted soooooo much time and money. It was also a main contributor to my hair greying at the tender age of 34.
</rant>
Craig.
On 2010-12-08, at 2:15 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>
>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>
>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>
>
> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>
> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
>
> - Dennis
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 21:15, Dennis Sosnoski <dm...@sosnoski.com> wrote:
> On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>>
>>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>>
>> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
>> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
>> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
>> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
>> their own WS-Security implementation...
>>
>
> I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
> That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
> with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
> commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
> security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
> differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
> which parts of the rankings may apply."
>
> Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
> the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
I haven't read the entire article yet, but I don't think that you made
any statement that would suggest that the Axis2/Rampart performance
issue is inherited by WAS (in contrast to the misleading comment made
by Craig). Therefore (and because I'm not affiliated with IBM), I
don't see the need for this. What could be interesting though is to
run the performance tests on WAS. I don't know the details, but I
think they are not using WSS4J. I've even seen some WSS related stuff
deep down in their StAX implementation, which suggests that they did
some special optimizations for their implementation. Considering that
there are some performance issues (or better, areas for improvement)
in the encryption/decryption stuff used by WSS4J as well, such a test
may give some interesting results.
> - Dennis
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Dennis Sosnoski <dm...@sosnoski.com>.
On 12/09/2010 08:53 AM, Andreas Veithen wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
>
>> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
>>
> Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
> between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
> the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
> feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
> their own WS-Security implementation...
>
I haven't worked with WAS myself, but thought that might be the case.
That's why I qualify my own rankings of the stacks in the latest article
with " Also, the rankings apply only to the base open source projects;
commercial stacks based on the open source versions may use their own
security code and other extensions. You'll need to look at the
differences between the commercial code and the open source base to see
which parts of the rankings may apply."
Andreas, why don't you add a comment to the article pointing out that
the rankings don't apply to WAS for this reason?
- Dennis
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Andreas Veithen <an...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 14:40, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net> wrote:
> That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
Interesting statement. Dennis' last articles were all about comparison
between CXF, Rampart and Metro. However, although IBM uses Axis2 as
the basis for their JAX-WS support in WAS 7.0 and in the Web services
feature pack for WAS 6.1, they're not using Rampart at all, but have
their own WS-Security implementation...
> Craig.
>
> On 2010-12-08, at 7:33 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
>
>> Fantastic ;-) Kudos to everyone.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>> On Dec 8, 2010, at 5:55 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I just wanted to let everyone know about Dennis' latest article at IBM
>>> DeveloperWorks:
>>>
>>> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jws19/index.html?ca=drs
>>>
>>> It's another well done article comparing CXF, Metro, and Axis2.
>>>
>>> I won't spoil it, but I just want to say "well done" to the entire CXF team.
>>> ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Kulp
>>> dkulp@apache.org
>>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>>
>
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net>.
That's great, his last article was very helpful at my last contract in saving me from implementing using "Web Services Pack for WAS" (aka Axis)
Craig.
On 2010-12-08, at 7:33 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:
> Fantastic ;-) Kudos to everyone.
>
> Jeff
>
> On Dec 8, 2010, at 5:55 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
>>
>> I just wanted to let everyone know about Dennis' latest article at IBM
>> DeveloperWorks:
>>
>> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jws19/index.html?ca=drs
>>
>> It's another well done article comparing CXF, Metro, and Axis2.
>>
>> I won't spoil it, but I just want to say "well done" to the entire CXF team.
>> ;-)
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Kulp
>> dkulp@apache.org
>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>
Re: Latest IBM DeveloperWorks article
Posted by Jeff Genender <jg...@apache.org>.
Fantastic ;-) Kudos to everyone.
Jeff
On Dec 8, 2010, at 5:55 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
> I just wanted to let everyone know about Dennis' latest article at IBM
> DeveloperWorks:
>
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jws19/index.html?ca=drs
>
> It's another well done article comparing CXF, Metro, and Axis2.
>
> I won't spoil it, but I just want to say "well done" to the entire CXF team.
> ;-)
>
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org
> http://dankulp.com/blog